Frosty Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 I always wondered what the smallest practical size would be for a puddling furnace. It tends to make me scratch my head when someone uses the words, "practical" and "puddling furnace" in the same sentence. Frosty the Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knots Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 It tends to make me scratch my head when someone uses the words, "practical" and "puddling furnace" in the same sentence. Frosty the Lucky. Now I am scratching my head. Are we parsing words or concepts here ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBower Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 I think Frosty is just suggesting that it's not a very practical idea. Lots of work and experimentation to recreate a scaled-down version of an obsolete technology, to produce an obsolete product that can be still be obtained fairly easily, or made in other ways with guidance from people who are currently doing it (i.e., various kinds of bloomery smelting). With puddling I think you'd be pretty mucn on your own, since AFAIK no one is doing that nowadays. But there are a fair number of folks out there smelting bloomery iron nowadays. That doesn't mean that building a puddling furnace wouldn't be fun and educational, of course! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.